Patrik Ragnarsson
Patrik Ragnarsson
Yes, see the above quote from the announcement
> Would it be a better idea to move ruby/setup-ruby into this namespace? Doesn't seem to be possible, see https://github.com/actions/setup-ruby/issues/80#issuecomment-674558401
@arnoldtonderaimarunda When did you install Ruby? There might be a newer version available now, https://snapcraft.io/install/ruby/raspbian says "Last updated 31 December 2021" (but I don't know, I'm not Raspbian user) Otherwise...
Looks like the test is still pending though? https://github.com/socketry/nio4r/blob/60b3d74af052c07ccad4c6d97868393243d5e42e/spec/nio/selectables/ssl_socket_spec.rb#L66
@sachingade20 do you have `ISRG Root X1` in your trust store?
From https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=gems.contribsys.com
It would be good to document / show how one can use this (it is not entirely clear to me, even when I've read the linked issue, but I have...
> could maybe add [that link](https://github.com/anchordotdev/puma-acme/blob/v0.1.3/lib/puma/acme/plugin.rb#L97-L118) for context and add how that change would make difference for acme-puma codebase? I think that would be good
Sounds like the complexity is needed to do the right thing? Or are we lacking one layer of abstraction?
Document that this can happen when you use `pumactl`?